• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Self testing is unreliable and unnecessary

I also use an empty tub to dispose of my used strips (after removing the label so as not to get them mixed up!) but as I use the Fastclix pen for pricking my finger I have no problem disposing of the lancets. They are enclosed in a drum so can go in normal household rubbish. (It says so in the instructions)
 
CatLadyNZ said:
Yes, the threshold is 48, and pre-diabetes is 42-47, and normal is under 42. Even if someone is in the high 30s I say to them it's best to try to reduce their number so they don't end up getting pre-diabetes then diabetes.
Click to expand...

Why? Prediabetes is there to stop people progressing to diabetes. There's no scientific reason to change anything when you have normal Hba1c readings. Why give advice just for the sake of giving advice?
 
mikej1973 said:
Why? Prediabetes is there to stop people progressing to diabetes. There's no scientific reason to change anything when you have normal Hba1c readings. Why give advice just for the sake of giving advice?
Click to expand...
I wish pre diabetes had been explained to me and I could have made less radical changes and perhaps delayed the onset of diabetes. I was simply told there was no need for action until I became diabetic. Only when I did the DESMOND course did I discover different. People need to be warned so they can make choices!
 
Absolutly!! But that's prediabetes not preprediabetes! Then lines are drawn where they are with good reason
 
MargJ said:
Meter and strips ordered. This may seem a silly question but how will I safely dispose of used lancets?
Click to expand...
do what i do and store the used lancets in an old strip tub!
 
Pre-Diabetes is like being "a bit pregnant". You are on the curve & need to start to take control!
 



We all have our own thresholds where our unique bodies like to be. This is why some people rarely see 4's when testing, and why it is rare for anyone to see 3's constantly, even though they are non-diabetic or diabetics within non-diabetic range. If 38 (HbA1c) is where your threshold is, so be it
 

38 is what threshold though? As a personal target for diabetic control that's fine. But people who don't have diabetes, who don't fall within the prediabetes range and have a normal Hba1c of 38 have a normal Hba1c. They're not diabetic or prediabetic and there's no need to get concerned until they hit the magic 42! 38 is interpreted by a lot of epidemiologists as truly normal.

Totally different for diabetic control but in non diabetics it's hypochondria! I've seen no studies to suggest someone with a Hba1c of 38 is more likely to become diabetic than 32
 
britishpub said:
That is a good point, I should and will from now on take a bit more care when I dispose of them.
Click to expand...
I read way back on the forum that strips can be disposed of in your rubbish, I personally rince them under the tap after use which washes the blood out of the strip. I also dispose of lancets by flattening the pin and they also go into my rubbish
 

Totally agree, which is why I said everyone has a personal threshold, and if it happens to be 38, then that is what it is,. Our bodies know where they want to be. 38 is 100% normal.
 
Bluetit1802 said:
Totally agree, which is why I said everyone has a personal threshold, and if it happens to be 38, then that is what it is,. Our bodies know where they want to be. 38 is 100% normal.
Click to expand...

My apologies! I get your point now!
 
Yes, 38 is normal and if a person isn't concerned about that, no problem. But when someone joins the forum and says they were 32 6 months ago and now they're 38, they're overweight with high BP, and both of their parents have T2, then I don't think telling them there is nothing to worry about until they hit 42 or 48 is helpful.
 

Where is this person who's never been diabetic but using this forum? A change of 6 points isn't indicative of anything. The accuracy of the test and other casual factors can easily explain the change. Especially as the person is still well within the non diabetic range.

If both parents are diabetic the testing regularly is advisable. Worrying people that are comfortably normal is wrong. The person you mention if they exist will be monitored by their doctor. When they become pre diabetic they can adjust and manage. That's the whole point of being pre diabetic! It's an indicator of developing diabetes. Someone with a Hba1c of 38 is statically no more likely to develop diabetes than some with a Hba1c of 28!!! It becomes significant at 42. Which is why the line in the sand is drawn there!
 
But will they be monitored by the Drs

My Hba1c is was 42 in May 2015, I have cardiovascular disease, had bypass surgery March 2014, since the surgery i have been unwell. Had symptoms of diabetes but Dr did not agree as I don't fit the profile as i am slim and have an active lifestyle. I was diagnosed as having chronic fatigue syndrome.
Bought my own tester in April and started testing after eating to find my levels going from 4.9 to 14 regularly, cut out all sugars and felt well again!
I am now on LCHF diet and as little as 7g of carbs will raise my blood sugars by 2 points, If I increase by more than 2.5 points i feel pretty rough for 4 days.
I eat to my meter and I live a much better life than I did 6 months ago because of it.
I recently changed Drs to try to get help, but no, was told I did not have a problem until I had an Hba1c of 48, I should throw my meter away as self testing is unreliable and unnecessary, he also said my symptoms and the fact i felt better after changing my diet where psycho symatic, the only help i as offered was anti depressants as he felt i was obsessed with wanting to be diabetic.
The only advice I took was to throw away the meter, was using Acuchek mobile have now changed to SD codefree due to the cost of the cassettes.
I will continue testing and eating accordingly.
 
The deadline for all meters to be compliant to the must current ISO accuracy standards is March 2016.

Change your BS machines to one of those that are compliant with the new(er) guidlines, as these machines have significantly greater accuracy...

ISO Standards for Blood Glucose Meters


New ISO standards drawn up in 2013 and meters must meet this standard by 2016

The ISO guidelines for blood glucose meters are a detailed set of standards which blood glucose meters should meet.

The name ISO stands for International Organization for Standardization, the organisation, based in Geneva, Switzerland, that is responsible for defining the standards.

Currently, the set of standards which need to be met are the set of standards that were published in 2003 (ISO: 15197:2003). In 2013, an updated set of standards (ISO: 15197:2013) were published and these newer standards will need to be met blood glucose meter manufacturers by the end of May 2016.

What do the ISO standards require?
The ISO standards have a number of different components which need to be met. The 2003 ISO standards included system accuracy and user performance components.

The new 2013 ISO standards included additional components such as:

  • Evaluation of instructions of use
  • Influence quantities of interfering substances
The system accuracy requirements are carried out by comparing blood glucose results of meters against the glucose level provided by a laboratory measurement. The YSI 2300 STAT Plus glucose analyser is able to perform the laboratory measurement.

The user performance evaluates the accuracy when the testing is performed by patients.

The evaluation of instructions for use is designed to evaluate whether the instructions for the meter are clear enough.

The influence quantities of interferents tests whether the meter can perform effectively for testing blood that has different levels of substances that could interfere with the result of the test. 24 potential interferents are listed by the ISO 2013 standards and these substances include haematocrit levels (the volume of red blood cells in the blood), cholesterol levels and levels of common drugs such as ibuprofen.

ISO system accuracy standards for blood glucose meters
Currently blood glucose meters need to meet the system accuracy standards of 2003 (ISO: 15197:2003) which state that 95% of blood glucose results should be:

  • Within ± 0.83 mmol/L of laboratory results at concentrations of under 4.2 mmol/L
    (Within ± 15 mg/dl of laboratory results at concentrations of under 75 mg/dL)
  • Within ± 20% of laboratory results at concentrations of 4.2 mmol/L (75 mg/dL) or more
In 2013 new, tighter accuracy standards (ISO: 15197:2013) were drawn up, requiring that 95% of blood glucose results should reach the following standard

  • Within ± 0.83 mmol/L of laboratory results at concentrations of under 5.6 mmol/L
    (Within ± 15 mg/dl of laboratory results at concentrations of under 100 mg/dL)
  • Within ± 20% of laboratory results at concentrations of 5.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) or more
The 2013 guidelines also now stipulate that 99% of readings must fall within zones A and B of the Consensus Error Grid for type 1 diabetes.

Blood glucose monitor manufacturersmust ensure their blood glucose meters meet the 2013 accuracy standards by the end of May 2016.

What do the ISO standards mean for people with diabetes?
The ISO standards are important for ensuring the blood glucose monitors we use are sufficiently reliable on a day to day basis. The move to the tighter 2013 standards is a positive advance as it will mean blood glucose meters will need to be more accurate and therefore provide greater confidence to us as users of the meters.

Which meters achieve the 2013 ISO standards?

In 2015, the NHS Greater Manchester Medicines Management Group published a review of blood glucose meters which included a review of blood glucose meters which passed either all or part of the requirements of the 2013 ISO standards. [142]

The following meters were listed in the review as providing independent and published evidence of attainment of the 2013 ISO accuracy standards:

The review also listed the following meters for which manufacturers provided independent evidence of only the system accuracy component of the 2013 ISO accuracy standards:

In April 2015, Diabetes.co.uk reviewed which blood glucose meters were stated, by their manufacturers, as meeting the system accuracy component of the 2013 ISO standards. In addition to the meters above, the following meters have been noted by the manufacturers as passing the system accuracy component of the 2013 ISO standards:

 

But your HbA1c was 42. You crossed the line to a not normal Hba1c so you join the system and hopefully tale note as you seem to becsuse statistically you are more likely to become diabetic.
 
mikej1973 said:
But your HbA1c was 42. You crossed the line to a not normal Hba1c so you join the system and hopefully tale note as you seem to becsuse statistically you are more likely to become diabetic.
Click to expand...
Are people at 41 not statistically more likely to become diabetic than people at 40?
 
Yes. But its not linear. And the arbitrary lines are where threy are with good reason if you're advising someone with a Hba1c of 38 to make any changes because of the possibility if getting diabetes than you are simply giving them bad advice. 0.25% of people with a Hba1c of 38 will get diabetes within 3 years. That's 1 in 400.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…